Biocompatibility Evaluation of Self-Adhesive Resin Cement and Glass Ionomer Cement on Human Gingival Fibroblast Cells (Comparative In Vitro Study) | ||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||
| Volume 71, Issue 1 - Serial Number 3, January 2025, Pages 349-362 PDF (1.52 M) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2024.335246.3257 | ||
| Authors | ||
| dalia ehab ahmed1; Saher Sayed Mohammed2; Hanaa Salem Moubarak* 3 | ||
| 1MSc Student, Oral Biology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Nahda University, Egypt | ||
| 2Assistant professor, Oral Biology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Minia University, Egypt | ||
| 3Lecturer of oral biology, faculty of dentistry, Minia university | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background: Dental cements can potentially release substances that negatively affect the surrounding oral soft tissues. Nonetheless, there is a notable shortage of comprehensive studies assessing the biocompatibility and cytotoxic potential of different dental cements. Aim: To evaluate and compare the biocompatibility of self-adhesive resin cement (BreezeTM) and glass ionomer cement (Medicem) using Human Gingival Fibroblasts (HGFs) cell line. Materials and Methods: HGFs were divided into; group I: control group cultured with culture medium only, group II: cells were cultured with glass ionomer cement (Medicem) and group III: cells were cultured with self-adhesive resin cement (BreezeTM). Biocompatibility was evaluated using hematoxylin and eosin stain, MTT assay, immunohistochemical staining with BAX after 24 and 72 hrs, and qPCR for IL-1B and IL-6 expression after 72 hrs. Results: Medicem group showed many fibroblasts with intact and regular cell membranes, although some cells displayed necrotic or apoptotic characteristics at both durations. In contrast, Breeze group exhibited numerous necrotic cells with ruptured membranes, along with apoptotic cells featuring shrinkage, membrane blebbing and apoptotic body formation, that were notably evident after 72 hrs. MTT assay showed significantly higher cell viability in the Medicem group compared to the Breeze group. BAX immunostaining was significantly more evident in the Breeze group compared to the Medicem and control groups after both durations. qPCR analysis demonstrated significant downregulation of both genes in the Breeze group, which was greater than that observed in the Medicem group. Conclusions: Glass ionomer cement (Medicem) demonstrated superior biocompatibility compared to self-adhesive resin cement (Breeze). | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Biocompatibility; Self-adhesive resin cement; glass ionomer cement; BreezeTM and Medicem | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 277 PDF Download: 176 |
||
